meh the breast feeding part pisses me off a little tho. Like women of a certain age shouldn't work in certain places? wtf. We should just stop with the chemicals and realize how much we can actually take.

Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave

At 7/26/2010 8:44:39 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:"We should just stop with the chemicals"Just about everything is a chemical. The only way to stop with the chemicals is to force every atom in the universe to undergo fission.

I like her "perceived convalescence" or whatever it was. The other day my sister and I were discussing how Apple keeps coming out with "bigger and better" products by withholding technology they probably already have.

At 7/26/2010 9:24:46 PM, TulleKrazy wrote:I like her "perceived convalescence" or whatever it was. The other day my sister and I were discussing how Apple keeps coming out with "bigger and better" products by withholding technology they probably already have.

ugh apple = evil.

Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave

At 7/26/2010 9:24:46 PM, TulleKrazy wrote:I like her "perceived convalescence" or whatever it was. The other day my sister and I were discussing how Apple keeps coming out with "bigger and better" products by withholding technology they probably already have.

If you're so sure they have technology withheld=, figure out what it is and come out with it first. They can't patent it without filing a patent. You'll end their business model, and still make quite a bit ^_^.

If you can't figure it out, maybe their business model is what's making it possible for them to figure such things out. In which case, if you enjoy using their products, don't complain about the only thing making them exist. If you don't enjoy using their products, don't buy them.

It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.

If you're so sure they have technology withheld=, figure out what it is and come out with it first. They can't patent it without filing a patent. You'll end their business model, and still make quite a bit ^_^.

If you can't figure it out, maybe their business model is what's making it possible for them to figure such things out. In which case, if you enjoy using their products, don't complain about the only thing making them exist. If you don't enjoy using their products, don't buy them.

Ragnar the two of us seem to come back to this argument repetitively. My argument to you is that culture plays too dire a role for your ideas of "voting with your dollar (for lack of a better explanation)" to work. IOWs, your focus is very tight. You see the economics and say to yourself "people have all the power they need by their purchasing choices (paraphrasing of course)." My argument to you has been and will continually be that there is simply more than economics involved. The video explains that culture plays into this as well, and your arguments DO NOT address culture. You cannot separate culture - and the conditioning we get from it - from the economics. That's the whole point of the "perceived obsolescence" point (and the part about womens' heels).

Additionally, even when you consider culture and environmental externalities/resource management/energy efficiency, she isn't giving us the whole story. She's not discussing the oppression and class stratification we currently endure which I have probably discussed quite enough with you. People who are not liberated cannot exercise their freedom of choice effectively.

If you're so sure they have technology withheld=, figure out what it is and come out with it first. They can't patent it without filing a patent. You'll end their business model, and still make quite a bit ^_^.

If you can't figure it out, maybe their business model is what's making it possible for them to figure such things out. In which case, if you enjoy using their products, don't complain about the only thing making them exist. If you don't enjoy using their products, don't buy them.

Recycling actually is NOT the answer, and it is a common misconception that it is the save-all of the environmental movement. Recycling is actually only the third-best solution available, and should NOT be utilized until the first two have been completely exhausted (she has a very small point about this in her criticism of our recycling program).

From a resource management perspective, REDUCING is the only way to go. In other words, instead of planning on recycling goods, we just don't make them in the first place. Industries have used reducing to become more economically viable by using less materials in their manufacturing processes (particularly of the toxic sort). Using things that are made to last instead of single-serve is another way of reducing. This is why I often argue that it actually would cost less to give everyone high-quality goods that do not need to be replaced than it is under our current system where we all buy cheap sh11 and replace them often. We are electing to get the worst out of both worlds (cheap sh11/high cost) instead of getting the best of both worlds (high quality/low cost).

This is not always attainable, and in cases where you cannot reduce you should turn to REUSING instead of recycling. The computer example in the video is a good reusing example - instead of recycling all the parts in the computer, let's just make the housing a (relatively) permanent piece of equipment while only replacing the cpu. In this way we have completely gone around recycling. Other pieces will of course need replacing sooner or later but you can obviously see that we throw out lots of good components that never needed to be manufactured in the first place, every time we throw out an old computer.

Recycling is only the last resort when we cannot reduce and reuse. Recycling is energy inefficient and many things have limits to how many times they can be recycled. And of course, the vast majority of the things we use are not recyclable at all anyways. Nevertheless, recycling is better than any of the options further down the list (incineration with energy recovery, landfilling, etc.) so we should still put every effort into maintaining and improving our current recycling programs.